Bullock v. Sears Roebuck & Co.

Second Circuit

Bullock v. Sears Roebuck & Co.

239 F.2d 170

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedDecember 14, 1956

DocketNo. 105, Docket 24213

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 239 F.2d 170 (Bullock v. Sears Roebuck & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bullock v. Sears Roebuck & Co., 239 F.2d 170 (2d Cir. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit which joined with a claim of patent infringement a claim of unfair competition. The latter was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, there being no diversity of citizenship. The complaint alleges sufficient interrelation between the two claims to establish federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1338(b), as interpreted in Maternally Yours, Inc., v. Your Maternity Shop, Inc., 2 Cir., 234 F.2d 538, 544, which was decided subsequently to the judgment on appeal.

Judgment reversed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit which joined with a claim of patent infringement a claim of unfair competition. The latter was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, there being no diversity of citizenship. The complaint alleges sufficient interrelation between the two claims to establish federal jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.A. § 1338(b), as interpreted in Maternally Yours, Inc., v. Your Maternity Shop, Inc., 2 Cir., 234 F.2d 538, 544, which was decided subsequently to the judgment on appeal.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 F.2d 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bullock-v-sears-roebuck-co-ca2-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack